Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Loyal to the Company

dilbert.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 107 posts

Re: Loyal to the Company

#11

Post by FredPret »

masterof0 wrote: post #7
buster wrote: post #4

But please don't mistake this with a general "no company is loyal to its employees". Maybe rare, but not non-existent.

I have yet to see a company where the "loyal" employees are paid more than those who leave for a better salary, or are exempt from laid off. I feel like "Company Loyalty" is one of those nonsensical ideas boomers left to the younger generation.

It's a business relationship and should be treated as such by the employees. Employee loyalty is ridiculous because it's clearly only one-way loyalty.

Re: Loyal to the Company

#13

Post by showdeddd »

vuln wrote: post #6

Employee loyalty is usually the priority that comes last, _just one more big push and then we can breath_ except the breath never happens and now management expects the next project to finish quicker with less people.

That breath has been "two weeks away" for about five years now.

Re: Loyal to the Company

#14

Post by wahnfrieden »

mcculley wrote: post #8
buster wrote: post #4

But please don't mistake this with a general "no company is loyal to its employees". Maybe rare, but not non-existent.

Do you have good examples of companies loyal to employees? I have been pretty loyal to my employees, but I have had to make hard decisions when the health of the company was higher priority than loyalty to an employee.

can it be called loyalty when it only appears to exist when it's not an inconvenience to the business or an owner's profit?

Re: Loyal to the Company

#16

Post by mcculley »

wahnfrieden wrote: post #14
mcculley wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you have good examples of companies loyal to employees? I have been pretty loyal to my employees, but I have had to make hard decisions when the health of the company was higher priority than loyalty to an employee.

can it be called loyalty when it only appears to exist when it's not an inconvenience to the business or an owner's profit?

This is why I am asking. I did not say that I made decisions against employees when it was an inconvenience to the business or to my profit. I made hard decisions when employees jeopardized the company.

Re: Loyal to the Company

#17

Post by brundolf »

kerkeslager wrote: post #10
buster wrote: post #4

But please don't mistake this with a general "no company is loyal to its employees". Maybe rare, but not non-existent.

No company is loyal to its employees. People are capable of loyalty, but companies are simply not capable of loyalty. One of my neighbors a few years back worked at a lumber mill for 30+ years, including some serious downturns in demand for lumber when the owner of the company took little or no pay to make sure he could keep on his employees. The owner of the company? Super loyal. The owner died, and his daughter, wh…

> No company is loyal to its employees. People are capable of loyalty, but companies are simply not capable of loyalty.

The smaller the company, the less distinction there is between "the company" and "the people who own it". So it's possible to have something like loyalty/trust with the company if you have loyalty/trust with the people in charge

But there's always a difference, and it can always change in the time it takes to sell, or IPO, or take new investment

Re: Loyal to the Company

#19

Post by kerkeslager »

brundolf wrote: post #17
kerkeslager wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No company is loyal to its employees. People are capable of loyalty, but companies are simply not capable of loyalty. One of my neighbors a few years back worked at a lumber mill for 30+ years, including some serious downturns in demand for lumber when the owner of the company took little or no pay to make sure he could keep on his employees. The owner of the company? Super loyal. The owner died, and his daughter, wh…

> No company is loyal to its employees. People are capable of loyalty, but companies are simply not capable of loyalty. The smaller the company, the less distinction there is between "the company" and "the people who own it". So it's possible to have something like loyalty/trust with the company if you have loyalty/trust with the people in charge But there's always a difference, and it can always change in the time i…

> The smaller the company, the less distinction there is between "the company" and "the people who own it". So it's possible to have something like loyalty/trust with the company if you have loyalty/trust with the people in charge

I understand what you're getting at, and this is why I support small businesses both with my money and politically, and when I can, by working for them. If someone has to look you in the eye when they screw you over, they're less likely to screw you over. And on the flipside, this is why I generally despise large corporations. More often than not, "scale" is achieved by creating enough distance between those in charge and those not in charge, and then mercilessly exploiting those not in charge.

But ultimately, the distinction between business and business owner will always be there at any size company, and loyalty, if it exists, will always be a trait of the business owner, not the business.

Post reply on HN